M/S Rajnish Enterprises v. State Of Punjab And ORS.

CWP-21814-2017 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-21814-2017 Date of Decision: 25.9.2017 M/s Rajnish Enterprises, Ludhiana ....Petitioner.

Versus

State of Punjab and others

...Respondents.

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL.

PRESENT: Mr. Aman Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J.

1.

In this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents No.2 and 3 to release the refund of ` 10,56,361/- along with interest to the petitioner for the year 2014-15 applied on 19.4.2017.

2.

The petitioner is registered with the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, having TIN No. 03141113051. The petitioner is filing its returns on time and for the year 2014-15, it had applied for refund of ` 10,56,361/- for the first quarter vide application dated 19.4.2017 (Annexure P-1). The said refund was to be made by respondents No.2 and 3 within a period of 60 days from the date of refund application. However, no refund was made to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner moved an application dated 13.9.2017 (Annexure P-2) to respondent No.2 for refund for the year 2014Gurbachan Singh 2017.09.27 13:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-21814-2017 -215 along with interest, but no response has been received till date. Hence, the present writ petition.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that for the relief claimed in the writ petition, the petitioner has sent an application dated 13.9.2017 (Annexure P-2) to respondent No.2, but no action has so far been taken thereon.

4.

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, perusing the present petition and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we dispose of the present petition by directing respondent No.2 to take a decision on the application dated 13.9.2017 (Annexure P-2), in accordance with law by passing a speaking order and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order. It is further directed that in case the petitioner is found entitled to the refund, the same be released to it within next one month in accordance with law. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE September 25, 2017 (AMIT RAWAL) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Gurbachan Singh 2017.09.27 13:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document